Cliched though that phrase may be, it's absolutely true. The border just became a LITTLE BIT safer, and the Mexican cartels just lost a LITTLE BIT of their stranglehold over nearly every facet of Mexican life.

I think it's absolutely prudent and appropriate to restrict its sale and growth, just like alcohol.. but I think it's an absolute sham to proclaim it as a dangerous drug. If you think you're just going to have a bunch of stoned-to-the-gills kids walking around your city, you're probably unaware of how many people are already high on a daily basis. I'm not a big weed smoker (maybe a couple times a year, if that), but I certainly see no reason why it's any more dangerous than alcohol (in terms of its effects on the general public) or cigarettes (and their effect on personal health). I don't think any of the three should be prohibited, and it's very concerning that there are those who would allow the government to simply dictate to a populace what they can and cannot do in their private lives. Driving high? Give 'em a ticket.

Borrow my analogy from earlier... say that, by some irrational change in logic, hordes of people will (only now that it's legal) get stoned and hang out in public... would you rather that, or have the typical college town experiences where hordes of kids stumble into the street drunk, fighting each other, making out while stumbling over cars, and driving while severely impaired? My answer doesn't take much deliberation.

__________________Bacon-wrapped shrimp: My first-favorite food wrapped around my third-favorite food. I'd go to a banquet in honor of those Somali pirates if they served bacon-wrapped shrimp.